national self-defense would seem to describe the case of anwar al awlaki. a citizen by virtue of his birth in new mexico in 1971. al awlaki has been linked through e-mails with major malik hasan, the army psychiatrist who allegedly killed 13 people at ft. hood in texas. he was also linked to the so-called underwear bomber who tried to blow up an airplane bound for detroit back on christmas in 2010. and faisal shaz ad. the guy who tried to set off a car bomb in times square in the spring of 2010. moreover, al awlaki had ties to at least two of the 9/11 hijackers. so what's a commander in chief to do when someone american by birth inspires others to kill innocent americans? we know that this commander in chief gave the order to take him out, which was done with a drone in yemen on september 30, 2011. president obama's decision reminds me of this story. in 1955 the israeli philosopher

yisha leibovitz wrote a letter to david ben gurion, israel's first prime minister, in which he complained about innocent palestinians killed during israeli operations. ben gurion then replied, "i received your letter and i do not agree with you. were all the human ideals to be given to me on the one hand and israeli security on the other, i would choose israeli security because while it is good that there be a world full of peace, fraternity, justice, and honesty, it is even more important that we be in it." that's "hardball" for now. thank you for being with us. "the ed show" with ed schultz starts right now. good evening, americans, and welcome to "the ed show" from new york. the obama administration's policy of targeting americans comes under attack on capitol hill. this is "the ed show." let's get to work. >> every american has the right to know when their government believes it's allowed to kill them.

>> the president's pick for cia takes a grilling over the targeted killings of american citizens. >> people are reacting to a lot of falsehoods that are out there. >> reporter: tonight, the man who broke this story, michael isikoff of nbc news on the revelations for the brennan confirmation hearing. first it was virginia. now michigan is flirting with state-mandated vaginal probes. there's a late update on this story. i'll talk war on women with terry o'neil and actress martha plimpton. senator bernie sanders has a new plan to stop corporate tax dodgers. >> corporations are people, my friend. >> the senator unveils his new bill here tonight. plus, someone actually made the paul harvey farmer ad better. and governor chris christie wants everyone to shut up about his weight. >> shut up. >> tonight, reverend al sharpton is here to give the governor some tips on becoming the biggest loser.

good to have you with us tonight, folks. thanks for watching. the confirmation hearings of cia director nominee john brennan got off to a rocky start today. human rights protesters from the activist group code pink interrupted the hearings before they even started. john brennan is the architect of the obama administration's drone warfare program, which includes targeted killings. once the hearing got under way, there was another disruption. the protester was escorted out. then there was another. same thing. seconds later there was another. and then another. finally, chairwoman senator dianne feinstein broke up the proceedings. >> we're going to halt the hearing. i'm going to ask that the room be cleared and that the code pink associates not be permitted to come back in. we've done this five times now and five times are enough. >> the chaos underscored the controversy of the administration's policy. many americans want to know how

the united states can order the killings of american citizens without due process. earlier today the justice department provided congress with classified documents about the targeted killing program. this disclosure was sparked by a leaked memo obtained by nbc news saying the government gets to define which individuals are considered imminent threats. but senators were not allowed to talk about the documents, which are still classified. senator feinstein did say it's time for full disclosure. >> when i asked to give out the actual numbers, i'm told you can't. i say why not? because it's classified. it's a covert program. for the public it doesn't exist. well, i think that rationale, mr. brennan, is long gone. >> john brennan would not commit to additional disclosures, but he defended the legality of the program. >> the president has insisted that any actions we take will be legally grounded, will be thoroughly anchored in

intelligence, will have the appropriate review process, approval process before any action is contemplated, including those actions that might involve the use of lethal force. >> to be fair, it sounds like the bush administration all over. democrats and republicans voiced their concerns, but it was independent senator from maine angus king who questioned the executive power of the president. >> having the executive being the prosecutor, the judge, the jury, and the executioner all in one is very contrary to the traditions and the laws of this country. >> unilateral execution power of the president is causing concern among progressives in america. no doubt about it. democratic senator ron wyden asked brennan, how can the united states target americans who have been denied due process? brennan's answer was consistent with the administration. >> any american who joins al qaeda will know full well that they have joined an organization

that is at war with the united states and that has killed thousands upon thousands of individuals, many, many of whom are americans. any member of al qaeda, whether they be a u.s. citizen or non-u.s. citizen, needs to know that they have the ability to surrender anytime, anywhere throughout the world. >> the controversy is not going away. the boundaries of transparency are still undefined. get your cell phones out. we want to know what you think tonight. tonight's question, do you agree with the policy of targeted killing of american citizens? text a for yes. text b for no. to our new number. our text number now is 67622. you can always go to our blog and leave a comment at ed.msnbc.com. we'll bring you the results later on in the program. tonight, i am joined by nbc news national investigative correspondent michael isikoff who broke the news of the memo earlier this week. good to have you with us. thank you. >> good to be with you, ed.

>> did john brennan say anything today in your professional opinion to shed light on the targeted killing program? >> not much. in fact, in some respects he said less than he's said before. i listened closely through the entire hearing, and brennan never once used the word "drones." he talked about lethal operations. he talked about counterterrorism operations. but even though he himself in a speech last year had -- was the first to publicly acknowledge this drone campaign that the obama administration has dramatically accelerated, he almost pulled back from that today, which was kind of ironic because we thought this hearing was coming at a moment when the administration was going to be more transparent. president obama last night ordered the justice department to share the classified memo with members of the senate and house intelligence committees. his aides indicated this was

part of an effort to be more transparent and open about this program. but we heard very little of that from brennan today. >> well, it seems like the administration is saying, look, we're on solid legal ground, it's up to you to figure out whether we are or not. do you think the senators are on board with this? >> there's clearly divided views on the intelligence committee. some like senator wyden, senator udall, and a few others want to see those legal justifications. they can read them now. but by the way, under the rules set up by the justice department the staff and lawyers can't come in to examine them. only the senators can read it. they can't talk about it because it's still a classified memo. they couldn't ask brennan about it at all in the hearing. this is reminiscent in some ways of the way the bush administration briefed congressional leaders about the enhanced interrogation program.

>> very similar. >> staff weren't allowed to come in. they couldn't talk about it. and what they were told and what they were not told became very, very murky. >> senator wyden took issue with the classified information provided to the senate committee. here it is. >> 11 united states senators asked to see any and all legal opinions, but when i went to read the opinions this morning it is not clear that that is what was provided. >> it seems we've reached the limit to the oversight that congress can expect on this issue, or expect to offer on this issue. i mean, it's limited information, even going to the intel committee. are americans going to have to rely on more leaks to get information? >> well, look, you read the white paper, which we did get a hold of and which we posted on nbcnews.com. and you see just how much

latitude there is in the los angeles in defining the three-part test of when an american who's suspected of being an operational leader of al qaeda can be targeted. you know, starts with imminent threat of violent attack, then capture is unfeasible, then operation will be conducted according to law of war principles. you dig into that imminent threat of attack. the memo talks about a broader concept of imminence than having specific intelligence about an ongoing plot. it says if there was past activities and the target hasn't renounced those activities then the assumption can be made that they're involved. look, there's no question there are bad guys out there who are trying to kill americans. and from everything the administration has said, anwar awlaki may well have been one of them. but the question is this is all based on secret intelligence. as we've known very clearly from

recent years, secret intelligence can often be floored -- flawed. what is the review process? what are the checks on this? who's looking over the shoulder to make sure that they've got it right? and those are the questions that this whole issue raises. >> we are back to the fundamentals of checks and balances. michael isikoff, great reporting. thank you for joining us tonight here on "the ed show." now let's turn to congresswoman sheila jackson lee, who is a member of the homeland security department and also the subcommittee on counterterrorism and intelligence. congresswoman, nice to have you with us on the program tonight. are you concerned at the level of transparency in this program? >> thank you, ed. thank you for having me. let me just also express my concern on the violence, the gun violence going on in l.a. and the cops that have been shot. i know everyone's prayers are with those individuals out there. absolutely, i'm concerned about our present status with respect to drones.

and i understand the american people's concern. i understand that we are a nation of values and of laws. i do want to make the point that none of us who are expressing this concern want to do anything to harm those agents who are in the field as part of the agency to put them in harm's way. and i think that should be clear, that the american people value what happens and how we're protected through gathering of intelligence. i think the white house did the right thing, though some would say that they wanted more by directing the d.o.j., the department of justice to send that -- >> but people have been waiting -- >> -- to the office of legal counsel. >> people have been waiting for these memos for a long time. they have been less than forthcoming. >> absolutely. and here's my perspective on this. one, we need to protect those in the field. but two, we've got to understand even after 9/11, those of us who are on the judiciary committee who fought long and hard when the patriot act was being crafted, for us to recognize that even though we have been in this dastardly, devastating loss that we will never forget, that

we had to deal with the fourth amendment and we had to deal with the issues of what this country stands on, and that is to value due process and to value our rights. >> absolutely. there was a big -- there was a big discussion in this country about the fisa court and the fourth amendment and the patriot act, but it doesn't seem the intensity is there on this issue. here's john brennan's exchange with senator wyden today about killing of innocent people with drone strikes. here it is. >> if the executive branch makes a mistake and kills the wrong person or a group of the wrong people, how should the government acknowledge that? >> in the interest of transparency, i believe the united states government should acknowledge it. >> congresswoman, are you satisfied with that answer? >> i think what is the direction that congress should take is the direction that senator feinstein has mentioned. one, that we may need to look at a legislative fix, if you will,

that deals with recounting our values, the fourth amendment, and then also just as we did, i dealt with the fisa court. all of that time frame a lot of us had the patriot act as it came out initially completely redone. we had a bipartisan initiative. of course, that went haywire. but what i think would be important is that we look at that format of a judicial review. not harming those in harm's way in the field but being able to utilize it as we've done for electronic surveillance. it will not, i believe, undermine in any devastating manner, but it should be reviewed as to how it could be utilized because people are trouble. i think it is important, ed, for us to be able to acknowledge that we live in a different world. i also think it's important to acknowledge that the drones allegedly were used for those who became enemy combatants on foreign soil. i gave my expression of concern for what's going on in l.a. simply to say this. i don't think none of us would tolerate the use of that kind of technology here in the united states for anyone engaged in the violence that that individual's engaged in.

but we do understand we live in a different world. it is important -- >>'ll well, we do live in a different world, but we've got the same old constitution and we've got the same old government of checks and balances -- >> absolutely. >> -- that we have to go through. and this is very similar to the way the bush administration executed the war on terror. would you agree? >> well, let me say this. i think president obama has expressed a concern by the -- even though it didn't happen when senators were asking for it. and this is an issue of the intelligence committee, both house and senate, by issuing and directing the d.o.j. to get that information out. we can't walk the same footsteps of the bush administration, but we must walk the same footsteps in protecting the nation against terrorism. we have now expressed our concerns. i think members of congress, appropriate members of congress will huddle on behalf of the american people, and we will raise the specter, as has been done in the committee hearing, of the fourth amendment, unreasonable search and seizure, and the opportunity for review. >> thank you, congresswoman.

congresswoman sheila jackson lee. >> thank you. >> thanks for your time tonight on "the ed show." answer tonight's question at the bottom of your screen. share your thoughts with us on twitter @theedshow and on facebook. we always want to know what you think. coming up, this is what liberals have been waiting for. corporate tax dodgers, you are on notice. your days of stashing billions of dollars in the cayman islands may be coming to an end if there's enough votes in the congress. senator bernie sanders is the man with the plan and he joins us next. stay with us.

coming up, state-mandated transvaginal probes are making a comeback as we rejoin the war on women already in progress. actress martha plimpton joins the big panel tonight for the discussion. new jersey governor chris christie says the chubby-chasing media needs to shut up. reverend al sharpton joins me later to talk about losing a ton of weight. and he's got some advice for the governor tonight. and more on who's responsible for the reductions in the post office. you can listen to my radio show

on sirius xm radio channel 127 monday through friday, noon to 3:00 p.m. eastern. share your thoughts with us tonight on facebook and on twitter using the hashtag edshow. we're coming right back.

welcome back to "the ed show." we've talked about economic fairness on this show. and thanks to the re-election of president obama, tax rates on the top 1% finally went back to the clinton rates of 39.6%. now senator bernie sanders of vermont is taking action to bring fairness to huge corporations not paying their fair share. this is what the election was about. the story always starts with the vulture chart, doesn't it?

because it shows huge income inequality between wage earners in the top 1% over the past 30 years. there's a huge difference. income disparity won't be fixed overnight, but at least the top 1% are back to paying the clinton tax rate since president obama won the fiscal cliff fight. now, the other part of this is the corporations. the effective corporate tax rate has been declining for decades. about 25% of large corporations paid no federal income taxes in at least one of the last five years. is that fair? big question mark. the effective tax rate for corporations is low because of loopholes encouraging corporations to do what? keep their profits offshore. less tax revenue for huge corporations hurts our economy. you want more revenue? here's your bill. it's a matter of economic patriotism to ask corporations to pay their fair share after they're making their money on our soil. this is the picture of the uglan house. you know what it is? it's a small office building in the cayman islands which many

companies use as their mailing address, even though their operations are located primarily in the good old united states of america. this is yet another way to claim a tax break, and it's a tax break these corporations should never be getting in a fair society. so there's a lot of talk about more revenue. every democrat should be on board with this bill. let's turn to senator bernie sanders of vermont. senator, great to have you with us tonight. appreciate your time. >> good to be with you, ed. >> your bill tackles a number of issues, a number of problems. explain how the corporations are keeping profits offshore for us and how it's actually hurting the economy and what your bill would do to change all of this. >> ed, the debate right now in congress is whether or not we cut social security, medicare, medicaid, and other enormously important programs for the middle class. that's what the republicans want. what some of us want is to say

wait a second, as you've just indicated, one out of four profitable corporations pays nothing in taxes. corporations in terms of their profits now, their rate is at 12%. the lowest since 1972. compared to europe, our corporate contribution to the tax revenue is the lowest of any major country on earth. so the question is how do we deal with that? and one way we deal with that is we say that it is absurd for large corporations to be able to stash huge amounts of money in countries like the cayman islands, which have a zero tax rate. they have no real presence there at all. all they have is a mailbox. and that building that you just showed has 18,000 corporations. it is a sham. it's a farce. we've got to end that. corporations cannot put their profits there. >> senator, this is an election issue. this is what we just had a big conversation in this country about. in your bill, i understand, will raise $590 billion in revenue over the next decade.

and it does this without double taxation. take us down that road. >> what it means right now is you have corporations who instead of paying an american tax rate of 35% are paying zero. and then you have an incredibly complex, manipulative system which allows them to deduct the taxes that they pay in other low-tax countries like ireland. so what we are saying, if you're an american corporation, if you're proud of being american, if you want to sell your products to america you have to pay your fair share of taxes and cannot behind some -- cannot hide behind some phony postal box in the cayman islands. furthermore, furthermore, this is a jobs issue, not just a tax issue. >> sure, it is. >> because what we're doing is encouraging corporations to move their manufacturing plants, their offices to other countries where the tax rates are much lower. >> well, you know, when president obama says we need

more revenue, i mean, this is the remedy. this is what this is all about. and this is what you have introduced. i'm glad you've done it. and it really is -- i think it warrants the support openly of the white house. i mean, how else are you going to get more revenue into the treasury? other than this avenue. >> well, what concerns me, ed, is you asked the right question. what the white house is saying, yeah, we want tax reform, we want to look at these issues, but we want to do it in a deficit-neutral way so that we will lower tax rates and eliminate these loopholes. to my mind just this one piece of legislation, which i think is a sensible piece of legislation, support i believe by the vast majority of the people in this country, could bring in all by itself close to $600 billion in a ten-year period. the choice as americans that we face, do you cut programs that the middle class and working people desperately need or do you ask finally large corporations who have gotten

away with murder for years to start paying their fair share? >> even if we weren't looking at cuts at the big three, this is still terribly wrong. there's still no fairness in this game whatsoever. and they have lobbyists have gamed this all the way to the floor of the senate. and there's no question that it needs to be changed. and if this election was about change and if it's about fairness for the middle class, i would expect every progressive group and every democrat and the president to get on board big-time on this. senator sanders -- >> you're absolutely right. i would only add that revenue today at 15.7% of gdp is the lowest that it's been in 60 years. we need revenue. this is one way to do it. >> senator sanders, good to have you with us tonight. thanks so much. >> thank you. >> coming up, the slow death of the united states postal service has real victims, and they are mostly in republican back yards. we'll go to the map and show you red country, what they call real america.

this is what the republicans are doing to you. and tonight, bad news for women who want to keep the government out of their bodies. the republican war on women, well, it's back on. different chapter. it's as bad as ever, and we've got the big panel talking about it tonight. stay with us. you can prevent gas with beano meltaways,

or treat gas with these after you get it. now that's like sunblock before or sun burn cream later. oh, somebody out there's saying, now i get it! take beano before and there'll be no gas. in the middle of the night it can be frustrating. it's hard to turn off and go back to sleep. intermezzo is the first and only prescription sleep aid approved for use as needed in the middle of the night when you can't get back to sleep. it's an effective sleep medicine you don't take before bedtime. take it in bed only when you need it and have at least four hours left for sleep. do not take intermezzo if you have had an allergic reaction to drugs containing zolpidem, such as ambien. allergic reactions such as shortness of breath or swelling of your tongue or throat may occur and may be fatal. intermezzo should not be taken if you have taken another sleep medicine at bedtime or in the middle of the night or drank alcohol that day. do not drive or operate machinery until at least 4 hours after taking intermezzo

and you're fully awake. driving, eating, or engaging in other activities while not fully awake without remembering the event the next day have been reported. abnormal behaviors may include aggressiveness, agitation, hallucinations, or confusion. alcohol or taking other medicines that make you sleepy may increase these risks. in depressed patients, worsening of depression, including risk of suicide, may occur. intermezzo, like most sleep medicines, has some risk of dependency. common side effects are headache, nausea, and fatigue. so if you suffer from middle-of-the-night insomnia, ask your doctor about intermezzo and return to sleep again. ♪

thanks for staying with us tonight on "the ed show." sarah palin. she called it real america.

look at the 2012 election map. look at all that red that's there. that's real america, isn't it? that's republican territory, or what republicans like to call real america. that's where republicans are elected year after year. and it's the area that's going to be hit the hardest by the restructuring of the post office. a restructuring crisis created by the very republicans elected in real america. now, while many americans, you'll shrug off the postal service's decision to suspend saturday service delivery, the consequences, my friends, could be devastating. not just that we're going to lose 225,000 jobs that are at stake, but the postal service has already started to close, or drastically reduce hours of operation at 13,000 rural offices across real america.

many rural communities that are republican, that have less than reliable access to the internet depend on the post office to send mail to do business and are going to be faced with shorter hours at the post office, meaning business is going to get hurt. it's going to be less competitive. many people think that companies like fedex and ups, they'll just come in and fill the gaps. they are wrong. it's estimated that about 30% of fedex ground shipments are actually delivered by who? the united states postal service. why? because it's cheaper. for ups and fedex to make the postal service deliver to real america. you see, the post office is required by law to provide universal delivery, regardless of geography and regardless of whether or not they're going to make a profit. it's a big service for america. this is a rights issue. this is more not so much about convenience. this is about what you in real america voted for. tea party america.

>> if it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. >> just when you thought it was a truce in the war on women, another republican wants to force women to undergo mandatory vaginal probes. actress martha plimpton, terry o'neil, and nancy northrop will rejoin the war on women already in progress. if you thought paul harvey's farmer ad was good, wait until you see funny or die's version. >> get me to factory farm. >> backed by powerful interest groups that spend hundreds of millions lobbying congress. and the reverend al sharpton has a generous offer for chris christie. tonight, reverend al joins me to tell the new jersey governor how to become the biggest loser. after all these years. but your erectile dysfunction - you know,that could be a question of blood flow. cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right.

you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or if you have any allergic reactions such as rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a 30-tablet free trial.

good to have you back with us tonight.

for all its talk of rebranding, the republican party doesn't seem to have learned the lessons of the last election. the gop has resumed its war on women with republicans in michigan plotting the next battle. on tuesday republicans introduced a bill requiring all women to undergo a transvaginal ultrasound before having an abortion. now, you may recall similar measures were introduced last year in virginia, but republicans backed off after serious pushback by a number of groups p tonight republicans in michigan seem to find themselves in a very similar predicament. house speaker jase bolger now says he has absolutely no interest in forcing a woman to have a transvaginal ultrasound. bolger vowed his chamber would not adopt any kind of legislation that would require the procedure. meanwhile, in tennessee republicans want to mandate a less invasive yet still medically unnecessary transabdominal ultrasound if a woman refuses to view the

ultrasound image. now, the ultrasound technician would be required to describe the image to the patient and force her to listen to the fetal heartbeat. here's how the bill's sponsor, state senator jim tracy, explains his motivation. "my wife had three babies and i've had the opportunity to see three ultrasounds. it's pretty amazing to see the ultrasounds." yet the bill doesn't make any exceptions for victims of rape or incest and perhaps the most extreme out of touch bunch in america you'll find in iowa, where republicans have introduced a bill there that would define abortion as murder. as the "ames tribune" newspaper reports and says, those charged with murder under the bill would include a mother who takes abortion-inducing drugs or a

doctor who performs an abortion. it also grants no exceptions for rape, insist, or to protect the life of the mother. so here we go again. i'm joined tonight by terry o'neil, president of the national organization for women. also with us tonight is nancy northup, who is the president for the center for reproductive rights. and actress martha plimpton joins us this evening. martha joins us from the set of her tv series "raising hope," which airs tuesdays on fox. great to have all of you with us tonight. terry, isn't this just more evidence, i mean, the republican party's been talking about rebranding and here we are back at square one, they're back after the same old wars? what about it? >> you know, ed, i think what they don't understand is that they need to change their policies. changing their rhetoric is not enough. and suddenly you have the legislator from michigan backing off. i don't believe they're really backing off that far. what they think they can do is use kinder, gentler language and still pursue a very extreme, really misogynist set of policies. the thing is that the voters are not fooled. and you know, it's not just women that are not fooled. male voters are with us. especially on keeping abortion safe and legal, especially in the earliest term of pregnancy, which is when over 90% of abortions are done.

>> martha, what do you make of what happened? it seems like political pressure in michigan may have turned this around. your thoughts on that. >> well, you know, they got a national audience. you know, they had a lot more people look at them than i guess they expected to have. and when that happens, when the larger population of the united states becomes aware of these smaller bills or these smaller efforts in states or when they become aware they get mad because they recognize what's happening. these are laws that are essentially designed to codify coercion, to make coercion a law, that women be forced into doing something that is not only unnecessary but that they don't want. they also assume, these laws also assume that women don't understand the implications of what they're doing already.

they assume that women are stupid and that we aren't aware of the biology of what's happening to us and that we haven't made our decision already when we've walked into that doctor's office. these laws also seek to undermine the relationship between patient and doctor, which is a very important, sacred relationship. and essentially, they're saying that the state has a stake in what you do with your body. and when the larger population -- when the american people get wind of that, they let you know that they do not like it. >> nancy, republican governors have rejected the medicaid expansion. won't that also affect women in a great way? >> well, of course. i mean, it was one of the things

that was well promised in health care reform-s that low-income americans will be able to have access to good-quality health care. and of course with women it's essential that they get access to good-quality reproductive health care. so it's -- i want to say criminal that they're being excluded. >> what do you make of iowa? this is as aggressive as it's ever been. your thoughts. >> well, i think what's happening in iowa isn't good. but what people have to understand, and this goes to martha's point, is that there are so many of these restrictions on access to abortion that are flying under the radar screen. once in a while it pops up. but it's important that you're having this on your show tonight so that people realize, i mean, there have been 400 bills dropped in state legislatures this year just on access to abortion. and so it's important that we realize, yes, iowa, north dakota, mississippi, and arkansas -- >> it almost brings the women's movement, martha, to a new age of activism. i mean, it's just got to be constant, doesn't it? >> yes. and listen, i'm not thrilled that we have to do it, that we have to revisit this fight. there's a reason we had it in the first place. it's because before roe v. wade women were dying. >> sure. >> we know what life was like before women had access to the full range of reproductive health care services that are guaranteed by the constitution. we know what life was like for

women before roe v. wade. and we're not willing to go back even if there are people in state legislatures who'd like to chip away at that right. we're remaining vigilant. and we have to. we absolutely have to remain vigilant. >> turning to the violence against women act, it has protected women from domestic abuse for 18 years. it has had broad bipartisan support in the past. but now house majority leader eric cantor is blocking the bill's reauthorization by not bringing it to the floor for a vote. house republicans have objected to new provisions that expand protections for same-sex couples, also undocumented workers, and native american women. here's senator susan collins pleading to members of her own party earlier this week. >> this is not and never should be a partisan issue. this is an equal opportunity crime that harms people

regardless of their political affiliation, their profession, their location, their status in life. it is an issue that deserves bipartisan support. >> terry, it sounds like republican leadership just isn't willing to listen to this. and this is discriminatory here. and they won't even bring it up for a vote. >> you know, the kind of violence against women act that the republicans tried to pass in the house in the 112th congress, last time around, was accurately characterized as exclusionary, racist, and homophobic. and here comes eric cantor singing the same old tune. you know, in the 2012 elections the one thing that the republicans should have learned is they have a problem with women and they have a problem with women specifically on the issue of rape. you would think that knowing that they have that kind of a problem they would be willing to pass an inclusive version of it that is about to pass in the senate, it's about to pass in

the senate. and what i am really eager to say is whether eric cantor remains adamant about not allowing tribal authorities to have jurisdiction over rape suspects. >> he just gave a speech earlier this week about where the republican party's got to go. nancy, what does this tell you? >> well, all of it tells us that we have to get back to thinking about the well-being of women. as you said, it has to be about women and the men who support them, saying enough is enough. drawing the line. we're not going to have this. women should have access across the nation to reproductive health care. they should have the same rights in mississippi that they have in new york. and they should be safe everywhere. >> how vulnerable does this make women now? >> you know, the appropriations are still there right now for the services provided under the violence against women act. >> i mean, when did this become political? >> honestly, it became political after the 2010 elections, which is the first federal elections cycle after the citizens united case. when you give extreme right-wing

leaders of huge multinational corporations a green light to go and buy all the elections they want to buy, which the supreme court did in citizens united, you get this. >> and you know, martha, when did it become political? i've got to ask you that same question too. the women against violence act. >> well, listen, there's always been a desire, at least in, you know, my lifetime to politicize women's bodies and women's health. that is something that, you know, the women's rights movement has struggled against for many, many generations before ours. what's important is that we remember that our health and our lives are not political tools and that american women reclaim not only their rights but their voices and actually get engaged and speak out and make sure that they are actually participating in claiming -- you know, we may not all agree on what the end game is for our lives as we live them.

but we must agree on every single american's right to live their life as they see fit and to experience physical autonomy. and one of the ways that we can do that is by ensuring that women have the right to access abortion and other reproductive health care services and also recognizing that women deserve and have the right to speak out about being protected in their homes and their workplaces and et cetera with the violence against women act. >> martha plimpton, thank you for your time tonight. nancy northup and terry o'neill. always great to have you with us tonight on "the ed show." thanks for joining us. coming up, the best commercial from super bowl sunday gets even better with a little help from funny or die. we'll show you that next. stay with us.

coming up, chris christie telling doctors to shut up about his weight. reverend al sharpton is here to tell the new jersey governor how to slim down.

and we are back. earlier this week we highlighted

chrysler's great super bowl ad praising the american family farm. however, we did bring attention to the fact that the family farm is struggling while agri-business, big agri-business is thriving in america. now the website funnyordie.com has parodied the commercial and made it slightly more accurate. take a look. >> and on the eighth day god looked down on his planned paradise and said, i need a caretaker. so god made a farmer. and back when america was founded, 90% of the population were farmers. but now it's less than 1%. so god made a factory farm. and then god wanted to maximize yield. so god made pesticides and herbicides and genetically modified seeds that are resistant to those chemicals. and god let monsanto patent those seeds. and god said, sometimes agri-business grows crops that no one needs, but they still

want to get paid. so got made farm subsidies. and then god noticed, hmm, there sure is a massive corn surplus out there. so god made high fructose corn syrup. and god said, well, now we've got to do something with all this corn syrup. so god made mountain dew. and cookie crisp and gushers. and then god said, okay, now it just seems like americans aren't willing to do farm labor anymore. so god made mexicans. >> if you want to see the rest of the video, you can visit our website at ed.msnbc.com. sometimes the truth hurts. tonight in our survey i asked you, do you agree with the policy of targeting of killing of american citizens? 78% of you say yes. 22% of you say no. coming up, chris christie, governor of new jersey, says size doesn't matter. but a doctor says the governor's dangerously wrong. we'll talk about weight and politics with someone who

personally understands both sides of the issue. stay with us. [ female announcer ] going to sleep may be easy, but when you wake up in the middle of the night it can be frustrating. it's hard to turn off and go back to sleep. intermezzo is the first and only prescription sleep aid approved for use as needed in the middle of the night when you can't get back to sleep. it's an effective sleep medicine you don't take before bedtime. take it in bed only when you need it and have at least four hours left for sleep.

do not take intermezzo if you have had an allergic reaction to drugs containing zolpidem, such as ambien. allergic reactions such as shortness of breath or swelling of your tongue or throat may occur and may be fatal. intermezzo should not be taken if you have taken another sleep medicine at bedtime or in the middle of the night or drank alcohol that day. do not drive or operate machinery until at least 4 hours after taking intermezzo and you're fully awake. driving, eating, or engaging in other activities while not fully awake without remembering the event the next day have been reported. abnormal behaviors may include aggressiveness, agitation, hallucinations, or confusion. alcohol or taking other medicines that make you sleepy may increase these risks. in depressed patients, worsening of depression, including risk of suicide, may occur. intermezzo, like most sleep medicines, has some risk of dependency. common side effects are headache, nausea, and fatigue. so if you suffer from middle-of-the-night insomnia, ask your doctor about intermezzo

and return to sleep again. ♪ and return to sleep again. i need you. i feel so alone. but you're not alone. i knew you'd come. like i could stay away. you know i can't do this without you. you'll never have to. you're always there for me. shh! i'll get you a rental car. i could also use an umbrella. fall in love with progressive's claims service.

and in the big finish tonight, new jersey governor chris christie is telling a doctor to shut up about his weight and his political prospects. the doctor just happens to be a former white house physician. >> i worry that he may have a heart attack, he may have a stroke. it's almost like a time bomb waiting to happen unless he

addresses those issues before he runs for office. >> here's part of governor christie's passionate response yesterday. >> that a doctor in arizona who's never met me, never examined me, never reviewed my medical history or records, knows nothing about my family history could make a diagnosis from 2,400 miles away. completely irresponsible. my children saw that last night. and she sat there on tv and said, i'm afraid he's going to die in office. my 12-year-old son comes to me last night and said, "dad, are you going to die?" >> governor christie seems pretty angry right there. but just a few days ago he was joking about his weight on david letterman. he pulled out a donut, right out of his pocket, and got big laughs. christie's poked fun at his weight for years. >> not asking me about hostess twinkies, are you?

you think behind this microphone having me talk about twinkies? this is a setup, man. i know it. you people are the worst. >> chris christie, thank you for coming back to visit our show. oh, stop it. really? did you try the -- >> the bacon cheeseburger was amazing. >> i think you are a little overweight. >> more than a little. >> yeah. >> why? >> if i could figure that out, i'd fix it. >> it's bad that i even said the word twinkie from behind this microphone. you're not getting me to do that. no way. david? and don't go to devil dogs. >> but obesity is honestly no laughing matter. the "washington post" reports 20% of all health care spending goes towards treating obesity and related complications. governor christie's already been treated for asthma. he says he's healthy. but he's at a higher risk of diabetes, heart attack, and stroke. he says he won't disclose his weight, but he insists that this should not be a factor in his political career. he says he's just fine. but doctors and political analysts say to be president of the united states you've got to be physically fit because it is part of the job.

so tonight let's bring in someone who personally understands both sides of the issue. joining me tonight, reverend al sharpton, host of "politics nation" here on msnbc. rev, great to have you with us. >> thank you. great to be here. >> there was a time in your life when you were one big dude. >> yeah. >> you went through a lifestyle change, and you turned it around. how hard would it be for christie to do this? >> i mean, it's all about willpower. i was over 300 pounds. i'm maybe around 140, 142 now. and i did it with no surgery. i just decided to lose weight. i became a vegetarian. i started working out. you've got to have enough discipline and purpose about it. and i think that what the governor -- if i was the governor, i'd be upset if somebody said i'm going to die. but he's going to have to answer the question. i think the doctor might have gone overboard. but if he thinks that americans don't have the right to ask anyone that's going to be the head of the free world their health conditions, and obesity is a health condition, then i think he's sadly mistaken. we have a right to address that.